SURPRISE! Guess Who Trump Wants Back in the G-7...[It Starts with R and ends with USSIA]

I acknowledge their economic standing. That isn't the reason they were kicked out though. They got kicked out over Crimea. So with that said, what leg does the US have to stand on with their history? Who are they to call anyone out, and vote countries out of the group based on questionable military actions?

Not much, and i think if the US was as economically irrelevant as Russia then it would get a lot of flak for their antics.
 
Good, Russia will be a great ally in the 21st century against the beast that is China.

Yeah, Russia-- the awesome sham democracy currently using all available means to sabotage our democratic process-- will be a great ally...

310131.gif


Good relations with Russia can only help the U.S. and the world at large! How come the Liberal nuts can't grasp that simple fact? So Obama reaching out to Iran doesn't make him a traitor but Statesman after he gave away the farm. But President Trump reaching out to another nuclear superpower to smooth relations, somehow makes him a traitor? Are you liberal dems listening to yourselves? Obama gave way too many concessions to Iran. America needs Russia's help in dealing with Iran, Syria, China, North Africa, and Middle East.
President Trump is deviously cunning! Mr. President, keep up the good work and stay strong!
Your posts hurt my head. All of them.

Like, are you aware that Russia is Iran's ally on the world stage and was one of the chief supporters of the nuclear deal?

Russia and China seek international support for Iran nuclear deal
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...l-support-for-iran-nuclear-deal-idUSKBN1HV10M

Russia and Iran Deepen Ties to Challenge Trump and the United States
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news...ties-to-challenge-trump-and-the-united-states

Do you know... anything?

I mean, "Jesus loves me this I know because the Bible tells me so," is great and all, but stay in your lane, rip.
 
Last edited:
Gets shit on for being inclusive and shit on for excluding. Can't win with the sheep.
 
I acknowledge their economic standing. That isn't the reason they were kicked out though. They got kicked out over Crimea. So with that said, what leg does the US have to stand on with their history? Who are they to call anyone out, and vote countries out of the group based on questionable military actions?

Which sovereign nation have we annexed land from recently? We might play in other people's backyards but we don't take it over and call it ours.

It's not a questionable military action that's the problem here is the wholesale taking of land from one country for themselves.
 
where did I defend Russia even in the slightest? oh that's right I didn't

Objectively, France is not a world power, hasn't been for at least 50 years, and contributes what exactly?

Italy, the country w/ the five star movement about to take it out the Euro zone? w/ a horrible economy? virtually zero foreign relations that matter?


also don't ever refer to me as 'you guys', you sound ridiculous when you do so.

You realize that France's GDP is twice that of Russia's with less than half the population of Russia? $37k GDP per captia vs Russia's $9k. If France doesn't belong in the room then Russia isn't even qualified to be the help.
 
Which sovereign nation have we annexed land from recently? We might play in other people's backyards but we don't take it over and call it ours.

It's not a questionable military action that's the problem here is the wholesale taking of land from one country for themselves.

So in short, a little destabilization and government overthrows never hurt anyone?

LOL, c'mon.
 
So in short, a little destabilization and government overthrows never hurt anyone?

LOL, c'mon.

It's a false equivalency. If you really think that multilateral military engagement in a country is similar to wholesale annexation, I don't know what to say.

You see zero difference between your neighbor throwing his trash in your backyard vs. going to city hall and having your backyard recorded as part of his property?
 
Gets shit on for being inclusive and shit on for excluding. Can't win with the sheep.
Did you come back to this forum just to spam this vapid nonsense?

Like who, WHO, in this forum do you honestly think would start a thread complaining about it if Trump didn't say he wanted Russia back in the G-7 today...

Do you even think about this crap?
 
Which sovereign nation have we annexed land from recently? We might play in other people's backyards but we don't take it over and call it ours.

It's not a questionable military action that's the problem here is the wholesale taking of land from one country for themselves.

We're just taking a classically Roman approach to the conquering. It's not as if we just hand over the countries after we've raped them with depleted uranium munitions, and then don't have an ultimate say in how (and who) they're governed by afterwards.
 
It's a false equivalency. If you really think that multilateral military engagement in a country is similar to wholesale annexation, I don't know what to say.

You see zero difference between your neighbor throwing his trash in your backyard vs. going to city hall and having your backyard recorded as part of his property?

You're downplaying what the US has done over the years.

Are you seriously suggesting that what Russia did to Crimea is worse than anything the US has ever done in the last 25 years, or so?
 
Did you come back to this forum just to spam this vapid nonsense?

Like who, WHO, in this forum do you honestly think would start a thread complaining about it if Trump didn't say he wanted Russia back in the G-7 today...

Do you even think about this crap?

The argument being just go straight to war? Pass all opportunities for better relations via negotiation? What are you saying?
 
You realize that France's GDP is twice that of Russia's with less than half the population of Russia? $37k GDP per captia vs Russia's $9k. If France doesn't belong in the room then Russia isn't even qualified to be the help.

It's bizarre. Russia is a fucking dump and Putin is completely inept at everything except causing shit and yet Trumpsters tirelessly tonguebathe him and think we should model ourselves after the Russians.

Similarly, their views on the Saudis have done a 180 ever since they rolled out the red carpet for Trump.

Their view of other countries is entirely contingent on how willing they are to flatter Trump. It's a fucking mindless personality cult.
 
You're downplaying what the US has done over the years.

Are you seriously suggesting that what Russia did to Crimea is worse than anything the US has ever done in the last 25 years, or so?

I'm not downplaying it. I'm pointing out that they significantly different things. Regardless of how you feel about various military actions that the U.S. has engaged in, the U.S. has yet to tell any people in the last 50 years that they now belong to the U.S. whether they agree or not.

Trying to compare the 2 is an apples to oranges conversation.

Take Iraq, we went in and forced regime change on them. Bad - probably. But we didn't take any of the Iraqi land to which the country was legally entitled and re-assign it to ourselves in perpetuity. Which is what Russia did. They took land that belongs to another country and unilaterally reassigned it to themselves.

Which is why I keep referring to the backyard example. Someone might mess up your backyard but it's still your backyard.
 
We're just taking a classically Roman approach to the conquering. It's not as if we just hand over the countries after we've raped them with depleted uranium munitions, and then don't have an ultimate say in how (and who) they're governed by afterwards.

Sure, I'm not saying that we're sitting on the side without exerting any influence but the influence that we exert is still predicated on those countries maintaining government control over their own internal borders. They might not have much leverage to argue with us but their borders remain sacrosanct.
 
Sure, I'm not saying that we're sitting on the side without exerting any influence but the influence that we exert is still predicated on those countries maintaining government control over their own internal borders. They might not have much leverage to argue with us but their borders remain sacrosanct.

Sorry, what's the distinction though? A different means of control? Principally, there doesn't seem to be much difference.
 
The argument being just go straight to war? Pass all opportunities for better relations via negotiation? What are you saying?
First, I am saying that your post (#45 itt) was stupid.

In response to the rest of your questions:

Maybe, just maybe, if Russia wants to be back in the G-8 they could... oh, I don't know... give back that part of the Ukraine they stole for which they were kicked out of the G-8.

Crazy talk, I know.

It would also be great if they stopped blatantly meddling with our elections before we started arguing in their interests.
 
Sorry, what's the distinction though? A different means of control? Principally, there doesn't seem to be much difference.

It's a significant distinction. It's not a different means of control. It's theft of land at an international level.

Russia did not annex the Ukraine, the entire country.

They are not being punished for exercising undue influence over the Ukrainian government's decision making.

They are being punished for looking at the Ukraine's borders and saying "We're redrawing the map and your borders no longer exist." So, the natural resources that used to belong to you...now belong to us. The roads that used to belong to you, belong to us. The people who used to call themselves Ukranian are no longer Ukranian. It's wholesale theft at a massive level.
 
Back
Top